Chernobyl's New Containment Structure On Wednesday night, I watched a fascinating programme on BBC4 entitled “Inside Chernobyl’s Mega Tomb”; the hour long documentary followed the efforts of an international project team (from 40 countries) to devise, build and move into place a new shroud for the ruined nuclear power plant.
The massive arch structure, looking like a steel airship hanger was a design success, a spectacular feat of engineering and a triumph of project management.
In presenting the solution to take over from the failing concrete sarcophagus hastily constructed in 1986, the film makers reprised much of the history of what happened on 26th April that year and in the aftermath.
Though I have seen, heard or read about much of the history, it was still depressing to re-cover it - the death, the ongoing illness, the exclusion zones, the 100,000 year toxic legacy (inside the doomed reactor 4) etc.
The gamma rays being emitted from the old reactor meant that the new containment structure had to be built 327 metres away from the reactor because it wasn’t safe to be anywhere nearer - once completed, the 36,000 tonne structure would have to be moved into place remotely.
Some facts:
The documentary was an interesting blend of determination/shared purpose/ingenuity/success (surrounding the civil engineering) and nervousness/fear/horror around the plant and all that it represented/still represents.
For me there were three key takeaways; first was that it was a damned shame that so much international engineering cooperation had to occur because of something so tragic. Still I suppose adversity breeds resolve and I know that the work was essential for the wellbeing of the world…
…but I found myself wondering what other goods to mankind could have been achieved if all the effort invested had been utilised elsewhere instead (if the disaster hadn’t happened).
Second was that anyone who supported the construction of Hinkley Point C should be made to watch the programme and reflect upon what would happen if a similar reactor meltdown happened in the UK. And whilst watching, remember Fukushima too.
Finally, in terms of economics, the expense of Chernobyl (its original construction, its in-life service, the national emergency after the meltdown, the new containment costs and the future clean up/decommissioning costs) can’t possibly have been covered by the value the plant created when it was operational. I wonder if the economic value created by every single power station operated in the old USSR or the new territories would even come close to covering the costs of Chernobyl. In the UK the economics are bad enough at Sellafield (and it hasn’t gone bang).
Oh and just in case you are interested, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development funded the project - the finance comes care of the following countries Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, China, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, Morocco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States of America as well as the European Community and the European Investment Bank. So whilst Putin is posturing and waving his nuclear weapons around right now (and invaded the Ukraine for fuck's sake), it's the rest of the world funding and fixing the nuclear fuck up caused when his beloved USSR was still functioning.
The documentary is available on the BBC iPlayer and if you missed it on Wednesday night, I recommend you watch it on catch up.
Blog Home
Blog Library
Home
The massive arch structure, looking like a steel airship hanger was a design success, a spectacular feat of engineering and a triumph of project management.
In presenting the solution to take over from the failing concrete sarcophagus hastily constructed in 1986, the film makers reprised much of the history of what happened on 26th April that year and in the aftermath.
Though I have seen, heard or read about much of the history, it was still depressing to re-cover it - the death, the ongoing illness, the exclusion zones, the 100,000 year toxic legacy (inside the doomed reactor 4) etc.
The gamma rays being emitted from the old reactor meant that the new containment structure had to be built 327 metres away from the reactor because it wasn’t safe to be anywhere nearer - once completed, the 36,000 tonne structure would have to be moved into place remotely.
Some facts:
- Arch measures 257m wide, 162m long and 108m tall
- 7 years in construction
- Project was 18 years in the planning
- Arch was moved into place at 10 metres an hour and took five days
- The arch is the world’s largest moveable land based structure
- It cost £1.3 billion
- The shroud has a 100 year operating expectancy
The documentary was an interesting blend of determination/shared purpose/ingenuity/success (surrounding the civil engineering) and nervousness/fear/horror around the plant and all that it represented/still represents.
For me there were three key takeaways; first was that it was a damned shame that so much international engineering cooperation had to occur because of something so tragic. Still I suppose adversity breeds resolve and I know that the work was essential for the wellbeing of the world…
…but I found myself wondering what other goods to mankind could have been achieved if all the effort invested had been utilised elsewhere instead (if the disaster hadn’t happened).
Second was that anyone who supported the construction of Hinkley Point C should be made to watch the programme and reflect upon what would happen if a similar reactor meltdown happened in the UK. And whilst watching, remember Fukushima too.
Finally, in terms of economics, the expense of Chernobyl (its original construction, its in-life service, the national emergency after the meltdown, the new containment costs and the future clean up/decommissioning costs) can’t possibly have been covered by the value the plant created when it was operational. I wonder if the economic value created by every single power station operated in the old USSR or the new territories would even come close to covering the costs of Chernobyl. In the UK the economics are bad enough at Sellafield (and it hasn’t gone bang).
Oh and just in case you are interested, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development funded the project - the finance comes care of the following countries Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, China, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, Morocco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States of America as well as the European Community and the European Investment Bank. So whilst Putin is posturing and waving his nuclear weapons around right now (and invaded the Ukraine for fuck's sake), it's the rest of the world funding and fixing the nuclear fuck up caused when his beloved USSR was still functioning.
The documentary is available on the BBC iPlayer and if you missed it on Wednesday night, I recommend you watch it on catch up.
Blog Home
Blog Library
Home
RSS Feed